Steps to Analysis

After reviewing the works of several different established and published authors in the field who use the descriptive phenomenological method for data analysis, I settled on using the principles and steps outlined in Creswell (2009). Creswell’s approach is based on a simplified form of the Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen approach as outlined by Moustakas (1994) and best

corresponded with my aim for analysis. The steps within this approach serve to illuminate the textual and structural description of the women’s experiences that would result in common themes of these experiences. Data analysis steps are fairly similar across phenomenologists’ experiences (Polkinghorne, 1989; Moustakas, 1994; Van Manen, 1990; Creswell, 2009; Giorgi, 2009); however, the steps outlined in Creswell (2009) promote systematic rigor in explicating the data and correspond well with my intent to ensure objectivity in data analysis.

My analysis started shortly after the interviews were transcribed and involved the first step of separating my own knowledge and experience related to women’s violence. This meant adopting the phenomenological attitude, which means to ‘bracket’ any presuppositions, notions, or ideas about the topic area (Husserl, 1970; Moustakas, 1994, Creswell, 2009; Giorgi, 2009; Broom, 2011). Within this, I needed to ensure any ideas, whether they be cultural, theoretical, or experiential, were put aside when listening to the audio and reading the transcripts for the sense of the whole (Giorgi, 2009). For each interview, I first listened to each audio recording and made some notes on their description of their experience. From there, I read through each transcript systematically, moving back and forth throughout the read to absorb the ‘whole’ of each

87

the contexts of the participants. I also cross-referenced this with my notes from the interview and my notes made when listening to the audio recording.

The process of bracketing is crucial to the analysis. To address and mitigate the potential for bias, I worked to maintain a bracketing position to increase neutrality and avoid judgment on the content based on my own experiences. This meant reviewing and analyzing the data without judging the validity and seeing it without disbelief or doubt (Creswell, 2009; Broom, 2011). As part of bracketing, I made notes as I worked through each transcript, as a means to reflect on the data and maintain a fresh lens on the transcript. Also important at the initial stage of the analysis was to set aside my personal experiences and maintain an open mind to new information rather than information filtered by my experiences working the field, which, as described by Creswell (2009), is difficult but possible.

It must be noted that in qualitative research there are situations or circumstances that must be contemplated so as to avoid influencing the outcomes of the analysis. As part of addressing my role as researcher, , I needed to acknowledged my position as the researcher as being shaped by having worked in the field. According to Borg, Karlsson, Kim & McCormack (2012) qualitative research must consider the reflexive process and how researcher subjectivity may affect the reliability of the analysis. Borg et al., (2012) notes,

"Reflexivity requires the researcher to be aware of themselves as the instrument of research. This is a particularly important issue for action researchers who are intimately involved with the subject of the research, the context in which it takes place, and others who may be stakeholders in that context." [52]

Locating myself as a researcher that has knowledge and experience related to the phenomena allowed me to be honest in this role, and to remain aware of this unique position while analyzing the data. For instance, I have extensive experience working with offenders and

88

victims of IPV and have worked on various initiatives, strategies, and policies related to IPV. I have also had significant involvement with Indigenous communities and governments including being part of the Truth and Reconciliation process which has also shaped my knowledge

location. While there was no reason to believe that I would not be systematic in the analysis, I did need to recognize the potential for my knowledge and experience to influence the data. Doing so, assisted in maintaining an open mind in data gathering and also during analysis. The technique of bracketing helped in minimizing bias that could have potentially impacted data credibility and/or the study outcomes.

The second step involved the identification and creation of a list of the significant statements from the interviews with respect to how the participants described their experiences. This includes the demarcation of the meaning units to see these statements evolve, ensuring each statement was treated as equal (Creswell, 2009). From there, I developed a non-repetitive and non-overlapping list of statements (horizontalization of the data). It is also here whereby the meaning statements are grouped into larger meaning units or themes.

The third step involved documenting ‘what’ the participants experienced in their use of violence. This is referred to as the textural description of what happened and includes examples verbatim from the participants (Creswell, 2009). In addition, a narrative summary of the

description in the language of the first person for each participant that temporarily reflects the original experience is also included.

Once the textural descriptions were complete, I then engaged in what is called the

structural description of the participant’s experience. This fourth step included documenting how the women’s IPV occurred. It is here where the researcher reflects on the context and location in

89

which the violence occurred and continues the engagement with imaginative variation (Creswell, 2009).

Finally, from the structural and textural descriptions, I then developed a composite textural-structural description to present what represents the essence of the phenomenon. Out of this emerges the identification of common themes experienced by the women that will contribute to a deeper understanding (Creswell, 2009). It involves an integration of all of the descriptions of the women’s experiences into a collective depiction of the experiences representing the group in totality (Creswell, 2009).

4.4.3.2 Strengths and challenges of the phenomenological method for data analysis